Showing posts with label budget. Show all posts
Showing posts with label budget. Show all posts

Friday, July 8, 2011

Thank You, Post-Standard

Gun-Barrell Politics: Holding government debt hostage is irresponsible

Editorial in today's paper by the Post-Standard Editorial Board 
with a paragraph directed toward Ann Marie Buerkle

“This display of people standing up and saying we cannot raise the debt limit, that is not responsible, after voting to spend and spend and spend, it is just more than I could take.” These words come from leading Republican Jeff Flake of Arizona — speaking during the administration of George W. Bush.
Republicans have joined Democrats in raising the nation’s debt ceiling 74 times since 1962 — seven times during the administration of former president George W. Bush. It is galling to listen to their sermons about fiscal responsibility when their leadership produced a hefty share of the nation’s staggering $14.3 trillion debt.
Tax cuts pushed by the brand-new Bush administration drained $2 trillion from the Treasury over the past decade. The trillion-dollar wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, launched in the early years of the Bush administration, were financed by borrowing — until President Barack Obama insisted on including the costs in the yearly defense budget. Bush’s Medicare drug benefit plan has cost hundreds of billions so far — without any way to pay for it.
It’s not too late for GOP lawmakers to hold their noses and raise the debt limit. After all, they promised not to endanger the nation’s credit-worthiness when they swore to defend the Constitution, which states that “the validity of the public debt of the United States ... shall not be questioned.”
But to win over even a few Republicans, the president must commit himself to an austerity plan that would slash and burn federal spending for a decade. Now GOP lawmakers are flirting with demands for a balanced budget — not seen since the last year of Democrat Bill Clinton’s administration. And forget about tax increases, according to the 41 senators and 236 House members who signed a no-tax pledge. Even ending tax breaks for corporate jet owners, hedge fund managers and oil companies would have to be matched by lower taxes elsewhere or more spending cuts.
Polls suggest voters are more amenable to raising taxes than tea party activists think — particularly for the rich and corporations making record profits. Besides, federal tax dollars pay for things people like. GOP lawmakers, including Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle, R-Onondaga Hill, discovered constituents were appalled by the Republicans’ plan to restructure Medicare and other popular social programs. Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget plan has gone nowhere.
Ending Bush-era tax breaks for millionaires when they expire at the end of the year might raise $50 billion a year — not nearly enough. Erase the cuts for all taxpayers and revenues grow to $300 billion a year. Add smart and significant spending cuts, including the defense budget as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wind down, and you’re on your way to fiscal balance.
The job can be done, and must be done. But not at the end of a political gun-barrel. “We’re going to have to deal with (the debt limit) as adults,” said current House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio — last November. Why not now?

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Cost of Wars: Theft from the 25th Congressional District


Dear Ann Marie Buerkle:

As of a few of minutes ago, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have cost the tax payers of the 25th Congressional District of New York $3,512,378,700. (See sidebar for Cost of War site link.)

In plain English, that is over THREE AND A HALF BILLION DOLLARS stolen from our district since 2001.
That is roughly $53,500 for every person in the district (FIFTY THREE THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS).

If we had that money back here tomorrow...

...how many teachers could we hire?
...how many jobs could we create?
...how many crumbling bridges could we replace?
...how many decent housing units could we build?
...how many people could we offer fuel and electric assistance next winter?
...how many doctors' bills could we pay for care for indigent children?
...how many lives could we save from treatable illnesses?
...how many tax incentives could we offer businesses to locate here? (And no, Bob Congel, I don't mean you.)
...how much research and development could we encourage to get ourselves firmly on the path to true renewable energy independence?
...how many farmers could we pay equitably for the work they do?
...how many nursing homes could finally afford to provide the quality of care their staffs came into the field to give?
...and finally, how long would it take for us as a district and a nation to commit to respecting all our people equally; to strive to help all our people achieve their potential; and to feel proud of our nation as we join the global search for peace .

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.
Dwight D. Eisenhower, From a speech before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 16, 1953
34th president of US 1953-1961 (1890 - 1969)

Ms. Buerkle, please aim high, higher that you ever imagined you could. Find your way beyond unquestioned allegiance. Think for yourself. Abandon the politics game. Follow your heart. Let compassion for your fellow human beings drive your decisions. 

Very truly yours, 
Blueskygirl 

Thursday, May 5, 2011

Ann Marie Buerkle: Potential Anti-War Crusader?


Ann Marie Buerkle is poised to become a strong anti-war leader. Consider the intersecting circumstances: 

  • She has great and justified concern about balancing the US budget.  She is concerned that we borrow forty per-cent (40%) of what we spend. Then consider that thirty per-cent (30%) of the budget goes for current military. Another eighteen per-cent (18%) goes to past military.

  • With the removal of Osama bin Laden, the US no longer has a reason to be fighting in Afghanistan. Also, the unsteady withdrawal from Iraq needs more push from Congress.

  • Buerkle's position on the House Foreign Relations committee puts her in a good position to voice her opposition to war. 

  • She has a brilliant background as a crusader. She has an unparalleled single-mindedness for advocating for what she thinks is right.


Blue Sky Girl can think of no one with more potential to become the newest champion of peace.

Go Ann Marie!

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Social Security Works Presents:


REP. ANN MARIE BUERKLE
Wants Us to Work ’Til We Die

  • Wants to cut our Social Security benefits and raise the retirement age 
  • Wants to take away Medicare as we know it
  • Wants to slash Medicaid―that’s health care for seniors, women, children and people with disabilities 
  • Wants to give wealthy Americans a huge tax cut
  
REP. BUERKLE’S DANGEROUS RECORD
Voted to create a “fast track” in Congress to cut Social Security benefits and raise the retirement age to 69 or more.  Voted to cut the Social Security Administration by $1.7 billion. 

(Voted YES on H.Con.Res 34, the House Budget Resolution, April 15, 2011) http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll277.xml
   (Voted YES on H.R. 1, Feb. 19, 2011; http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll147.xml)

Voted to take away Medicare as we know it and leave us at the mercy of insurance companies.  Voted to double seniors’ costs and to raise the age of eligibility for Medicare from 65 to 67.
(Voted YES on H.Con.Res. 34, the House Budget Resolution, April 15, 2011) http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll277.xml

Voted to slash $1.4 trillion from Medicaid – the health care program for seniors, women, children and people with disabilities. 
(Voted YES on H.Con.Res. 34, the House Budget Resolution, April 15, 2011) http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll277.xml

Voted to give a $1.1 trillion tax cut to the richest Americans and to cut their tax rate and the corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%. 
 (Voted YES on H.Con.Res. 34, the House Budget Resolution, April 15, 2011) http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll277.xml


TELL REP. BUERKLE:

Hands Off Social Security, Medicare, 

and Medicaid!




Explanation of Votes in Congress
The House Republican Budget Resolution (H.Con.Res. 34) sets forth the congressional budget for the federal government for Fiscal Year 2012, including the appropriate budgetary levels for FY2013-FY2021.  It was approved 235 to 193 on April 15, 2011 (Roll Call Vote 277).  It would drastically restructure the Medicare and Medicaid programs while implementing a “fast track” procedure for cutting Social Security benefits. Specifically it would:

Voted to create a “fast track” procedure to force action on Social Security. This likely would result in significant benefit cuts, including an increase in the retirement age to 69 or more. It would require the President and Congress to take up Social Security reform under “expedited procedures” whenever there is a projected shortfall (there is currently a shortfall projected in 2037). The Republican budget endorses deep cuts to Social Security benefits, as described by Rep. Paul Ryan in “The Path to Prosperity.

Voted to take away Medicare as we know it – the traditional Medicare program. Beginning in 2022, new Medicare enrollees would have to buy coverage through a private insurance company.  Medicare would provide seniors with a subsidy to purchase coverage, but it would not keep pace with rising medical costs. By 2022 a 65-year-old’s average share of costs would be nearly $7,000 higher than under the current system, $12,500 rather than $5,630.  This increase would consume nearly 50 percent of their Social Security benefits. The increase in the Medicare eligibility age to 67, from 65, represents even further benefit cuts.

Voted to slash $1.4 trillion from Medicaid. This would be achieved by converting the program into a block-grant to states and repealing the Affordable Care Act health care reform. A block-grant will cap the amount payable to states, which will respond by reducing eligibility and services and increasing cost sharing. Repealing the Affordable Care Act will eliminate 16 million new people estimated to get Medicaid coverage. 

Voted give a $1.1 trillion tax cut to the richest Americans and to cut their tax rate and the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent. The Republican budget extended all of President Bush’s tax cuts, which would cut taxes by $700 billion over 10 years for the richest 2 percent of Americans. It also would cut taxes by $371.4 billion for the richest Americans by repealing the surtax on investment income and additional Hospital Insurance tax contained in the Affordable Care Act. The Republican budget also would cut the top marginal tax rate for individuals from 35 percent to 25 percent and reduce the corporate tax rate by the same amount. (No estimates are available about how much more that would save individuals and corporations in taxes.)   

Voted to cut the Social Security Administration by $1.7 billion, H.R. 1: This was a House Republican proposal to fund the government through the end of Fiscal Year 2011. It was approved 239 to 189 on February 19, 2011 (Roll Call Vote 147). Among its $61 billion in cuts from President Obama’s budget was a $1.7 billion cut to the Social Security Administration (SSA) below the level needed to provide promised service levels and to fund current projects. It was estimated that H.R. 1 would have the following effects: SSA would have had to furlough its workers for up to one month by the end of 2011; up to 400,000 people would have had their retirement, survivors, and Medicare applications significantly delayed, becoming part of a large and growing backlog; and up to 290,000 people would have had their disability benefit applications delayed.


Notes:

Paul Ryan, “Advancing Social Security Reforms,” in Path to Prosperity, April 2011, p. 48. Available at http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf

Kaiser Family Foundation, “Proposed Changes to Medicare in ‘Path to Prosperity,’” April 2011. Available at http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/8179.pdf

Kaiser Family Foundation, “Medicaid and the Uninsured: Implications of a Federal Block Grant for Medicaid,” April 2011. Available at http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/8173.pdf 

Center on Budget & Policy Priorities, “Statement of Robert Greenstein, President, on Chairman Ryan’s Budget Plan,” April 20, 2011, available at http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3452; Tax Policy Center, “Reduce Corporate Income Tax Rate and Repeal Various Income Tax and Payroll Tax Provisions: Impact on Tax Revenue vs. Current Policy Baseline, 2012-2021,” April 7, 2011, available at http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/Content/PDF/T11-0088.pdf.

Ibid, Path to Prosperity, p. 6. Available at  http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf  


House Ways and Means Committee Democratic Staff, “Ways and Means Democrats Blast Republican Plan to Shut Down Social Security Administration,” February 15, 2011. Available at http://democrats.waysandmeans.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=11465

Monday, April 18, 2011

War is Breaking Us


Thanks, Code Pink and War Resisters League!
Here is the fine print: 
Half this pie feeds war. 
Increase in military spending since 2000 
could cost the economy close to 2 million jobs in the long run. 
"Massive Defense Spending Leads to Job Loss," 
Center  for Economic and Policy Research, Nov. 2009 
(warresisters.org/federalpiechart)

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Ann Marie Buerkle: Crunch These

Federal Budget for 2010      
$3,456,000,000,000 - that reads Three Trillion Four Hundred and Fifty-six Billion Dollars


Federal Funds to Corporation For Public Broadcasting (NPR and Public Television) for 2010
$420,000,000 - Four Hundred Twenty Million Dollars


Federal Funds to Planned Parenthood nationally for 2010
$360,000,000 - Three Hundred and Sixty Million Dollars


Cost of LI HEAP -Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program for 2010
$5,100,000,000 - Five Billion One Hundred Million Dollars


Cost of Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan 2010
$130,000,000,000 - One Hundred Thirty Billion Dollars


Total Cost of Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan Ten Years 2001-2011
$1,179,000,000,000 - One Trillion One Hundred Seventy-nine Billion (approximately) -  see side bar on right column for up to date costs.


Total Cost to 25th Congressional District for Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan Ten Years 2001-2011
$3,473,000,000 - Three Billion Four Hundred Seventy-three Million (approximately) - go to web site Cost of War for exact numbers: http://costofwar.com/en/state/NY/congdistrict/25/


Taxes at a rate of 20% on Bill Gates' annual income would approximately equal the federal funds to Planned Parenthood for one year.

Friday, April 8, 2011

Why Only Vera House?

My respect for any agency that supports girls and women is great, and it is a good day when any public service agency makes the news.

When Ann Marie Buerkle is public in Washington about her support for Vera House in Syracuse, an agency that has long been rock solidly there for women and men who are victims of domestic violence and/or rape, I applaud her. That we are reminded of the need and the services every year at this time by the White Ribbon Campaign is important.

Therefore I cannot for the life of me think why Ann Marie would be so totally against Planned Parenthood. In so many ways Planned Parenthood and Vera House are similar, and the two agencies share many of the same values and concerns.

I cannot document with numbers but I think, based on years of work in many areas of social services, that there are crossover service needs between these two agencies and many other local programs as well.

Vera House and Planned Parenthood do not offer duplicate services. They offer companion services because any person who comes for services at either one may well have more than one need, not always able to be filled by the primary agency.

For example:

  • A woman who has been raped may also want reproductive services, up to and including, though not necessarily, an abortion. Planned Parenthood is an option.
  • While a woman is being seen for family planning services, the nurse may learn that the woman is in a situation at home that includes domestic abuse. Her children may also be in danger. The family may need sheltering. Vera House can help.
  • A man or woman being abused at home may realize she/he needs to be tested for sexually transmitted diseases and ask for a referral to PP.
  • A clinic patient may disclose her own childhood abuse and be referred to Vera House for counseling.
The budgets for the two agencies, Vera House and Planned Parenthood have many similarities. What I want to address from here onward is that both receive a share of their budgets from government entities. In fact they cannot operate without these monies. Our federal and state governments have both deemed human services as areas that smaller communities and individuals cannot provide by themselves.

On Vera House's website there are very nice pie charts showing the following, which cannot be copied to here but I recommend you visit. Here is Vera House's budget picture for 2009:

Support and Revenue
2009 Support and Revenue as %
Government Fees & Grants 71%
Private Donations 14%
United Way  9%
Fees 3%
Other Revenue 3%

2009 Support and Revenue in $
Government Fees & Grants $2,379,539
Private Donations 464,284
United Way 302,151
Fees 107,414
Other Revenue 105,003
Total Support & Revenue $3,358,391

Expenses
2009 Expenses as %
p = program expenses, s = program support expenses
Emergency Shelter  p 28%
Counseling  p 20%
Education & Awareness  p 20%
Outreach & Advocacy  p 18%
Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner  p 5%
Fundraising  s 4%
Alternatives  p 3%
Administrative  s 2%

Program Services (p) in $  =  94%
Emergency Shelter $852,549
Counseling 632,301
Education & Community Awareness 594,903
Outreach & Advocacy 565,195
Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner 156,467
Alternatives 124,350
Total Program Expenses $2,925,765

Supporting Services (s) in $  = 6%
Fundraising  $134,403
Administrative 57,718
Total Supporting Services  $192,121
Total Expenses $3,117,886
        _________________
Next is the national budget for Planned Parenthood. I do not have local numbers but believe that local numbers are more or less reflected in the national budget. The actual numbers for the two entities, Vera House and Planned Parenthood are obviously therefore miles apart. But there are programs comparable to Vera House all over the land who receive federal Titles money, for which I am thankful. I show this next budget to illustrate how Planned Parenthood compares to Vera House for reliance upon government funding:

Let me also say, for the record, that I wish sister agencies could look out for each other. What is being done to women by harming Planned Parenthood is violence of a sort. I wish for Vera House and its counterparts to find public ways to advocate for Planned Parenthood.